VulnerabilityPublished 24 Sep 2024

CVE-2024-46610: iceCMS · Improper Access Control

Affects iceCMSSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.6 High : upgrade to 3.4.8 soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 11:07 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.6High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 40% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 3.4.8

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
Availability: Low

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 24 Sep 2024
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade thecosy/iceCMS to 3.4.8.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubthecosy/iceCMS`pkg:github/thecosy/iceCMS`Other threats	Affected <3.4.8	Fixed in 3.4.8

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2024-46610, organizations should first verify if they are running IceCMS version 3.4.7 or earlier and prioritize upgrading to a fixed version once available. In the absence of an official patch, implement strict access control policies restricting who can access the /User/ChangeUser/s endpoint, ideally limiting it to trusted administrators only. Employ web application firewalls (WAFs) to detect and block suspicious POST requests targeting this endpoint. Conduct thorough audits of user permissions and monitor logs for unusual user modification activities. Enforce multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce the risk of compromised credentials being exploited. Additionally, review and harden the application’s authorization logic to ensure proper validation of user privileges before processing sensitive changes. Regularly back up user data and have incident response plans ready to address potential account compromises. Finally, educate users and administrators about the risks of phishing and social engineering that could facilitate exploitation requiring user interaction.

Description

An access control issue in IceCMS v3.4.7 and before allows attackers to arbitrarily modify users' information, including username and password, via a crafted POST request sent to the endpoint /User/ChangeUser/s in the ChangeUser function in UserController.java

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-46610 is the unauthorized modification of user credentials and information, which can lead to account takeover and privilege escalation within IceCMS deployments. This compromises the confidentiality and integrity of user data, potentially allowing attackers to impersonate legitimate users or administrators. Such unauthorized access can facilitate further attacks, including data theft, unauthorized content changes, or disruption of services. Although availability impact is low, the breach of trust and control over user accounts can have severe operational and reputational consequences for organizations. Enterprises relying on IceCMS for content management, especially those in sectors like government, finance, healthcare, or critical infrastructure, face increased risk of targeted exploitation. The requirement for some level of authentication and user interaction limits the attack surface but does not eliminate it, as insider threats or compromised accounts could be leveraged. The absence of known exploits in the wild currently provides a window for proactive defense but also underscores the urgency for remediation before exploitation becomes widespread.

CWE-284Improper Access Control (opens in a new tab)
Pillar weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #19OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Operation
Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Third Party Javascript Management (opens in a new tab)
Virtual Patching (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.10.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Embedding Scripts within Scripts (opens in a new tab)
Modification of Windows Service Configuration (opens in a new tab)
Malicious Root Certificate (opens in a new tab)
Intent Spoof (opens in a new tab)
WebView Exposure (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 28 Feb 2026, 07:27 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-284

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats